Mandibular alveolar bone thickness in untreated Class I subjects with different vertical skeletal patterns: a cone-beam computed tomography study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the mandibular alveolar bone thickness in untreated skeletal Class I subjects with different vertical skeletal patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 50 preorthodontic treatment cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of a skeletal Class I Chinese population with near-normal occlusion were selected. The buccal and lingual alveolar bone thicknesses of mandibular canines to second molars were measured at 2 mm below the cementoenamel junction (CEJ), mid-root, and root apex levels. Differences in the measurements were analyzed with Mann-Whitney U-test. The correlation between alveolar bone thickness and the sella-nasion-mandibular plane (SN-MP) angle was calculated using Pearson correlation coefficients and linear regression analysis. RESULTS: Buccal alveolar bone was thinner on all mandibular canines to first molars but thicker on second molars in comparison with lingual alveolar bone. Buccal alveolar bone was within 1 mm at the levels of 2 mm below CEJ and mid-root for the canines and first premolars. Significant differences were detected among subjects with different vertical patterns, with a negative correlation between the SN-MP angle and alveolar thickness, especially in the canine and premolar regions. The thinnest buccal and lingual alveolar bone were detected in the high-angle group canine region (0.50 mm at the levels of 2 mm below CEJ and mid-root for the buccal side, 0.90 mm at the level of 2 mm below the CEJ for the lingual side). CONCLUSIONS: To avoid periodontal complications, buccal-lingual movement of the mandibular canines and first premolars should be limited, especially in high-angle patients.

Awareness and Knowledge of Oral Cancer and Potentially Malignant Oral Disorders among Dental Patients in Far North Queensland, Australia.

BACKGROUND: Public awareness/knowledge on oral and pharyngeal cancer (OPC), potentially malignant disorders (PMODs) and their risk factors is crucial for prevention and early detection of OPC and PMODs. Yet, there are no published data available on the awareness and knowledge of OPC and PMODs among people living in Far North Queensland, Australia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted as a cross sectional survey. A self-administered questionnaire was designed and consisted of relevant questions to ascertain socio-demographic information, awareness and knowledge of OPC, PMODs and risk factors and questions on participant's exposure to risk factors and dietary history were also included. Survey was carried out at the Dental Clinic of the James Cook University School of Dentistry (JCU Dental), Cairns, Australia. Subjects above the age of 20 years (n=366) were randomly selected during the period from 31st July to 6th September 2013 and questionnaire was distributed to complete while they are waiting for treatment. Data analysis was carried out using SPSS version 21 and the chi -squared test was employed to compare groups. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The study revealed that 52.3% of the respondents were aware of the existence of OPC but only 19.0% were aware of PMODs. Of those who were aware of oral cancer, 92% agreed or strongly agreed that smoking is a strong risk factor for OPC. Similarly a relatively high proportion of the respondents agreed or strongly agreed that tobacco chewing (84%), tobacco chewing with areca nut (68%), chewing areca nut alone (51%) and exposure to actinic radiation (71%) as risk factors. However, the results for alcohol intake, age, and HPV infection were found to be relatively poor with proportions 33%, 34%, and 23% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed an alarming lack of awareness and knowledge of OPC and PMODs.